Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Princess L on October 31, 2012, 07:45:45 PM

Title: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Princess L on October 31, 2012, 07:45:45 PM
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: tonymctones on October 31, 2012, 07:50:58 PM
they dont care, the ends justify the means to them
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: tbombz on October 31, 2012, 07:58:44 PM
am i missing, something? princess, tony, do you think it immoral to adapt ones political views to song? lol
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Princess L on October 31, 2012, 08:17:48 PM
am i missing, something? princess, tony, do you think it immoral to adapt ones political views to song? lol

I'm sure you'd be proud to have this congresswoman representing you.  ::)
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: tonymctones on October 31, 2012, 08:21:10 PM
am i missing, something? princess, tony, do you think it immoral to adapt ones political views to song? lol
This is a congress woman, do you approve of elected officials acting like idiots?

Here you go drizzle, do you object to this?

Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Primemuscle on October 31, 2012, 08:30:53 PM
I'm sure you'd be proud to have this congresswoman representing you.  ::)

Is one of the qualifications for being a member of congress the ability to carry a tune? I was not aware that it was. There are 535 members of congress. Not all of them a great singers, I am pretty sure.

Quote
Gwen Moore Sends Letter Urging Regulators to Weigh Rulemaking Impact on Small and Community Banks
 
Milwaukee, WI - Today, Congresswoman Gwen Moore (WI-4) submitted a letter to U.S. banking regulators on behalf of a bipartisan coalition of Members of Congress from the Wisconsin delegation asking regulators to consider a scaled approach to the implementation of Basel III banking regulations for small and community banks.

Representative Moore was pleased to have the support of Representatives Duffy, Kind, Petri, Ribble and Sensenbrenner.

http://gwenmoore.house.gov/#dialog (http://gwenmoore.house.gov/#dialog)

 
 
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Primemuscle on October 31, 2012, 08:40:49 PM
This is a congress woman, do you approve of elected officials acting like idiots?


I hope you don't believe making a bit of a fool of oneself is limited to this congresswoman or to Democrats.
Quote

List of federal political sex scandals in the United States
2010–2012

 Robert Decheine (D) Chief of Staff to Rep. Steve Rothman (D), was sentenced to 18 months in prison for soliciting sex from a minor. (2011)

 Thad Viers (R) the three term South Carolina state representative withdrew as a candidate for the US Congress in January 2012 after he had been arrested on charges of harassing a 28 year old woman described as an ex-girlfriend. He was released on a $5000 bond and subsequently withdrew from the race citing "personal reasons".
 
 Herman Cain (2012 Republican presidential candidate) was accused of sexual harassment by several women including Sharon Bialek, Karen Kraushaar, and having a 13 year affair with Ginger White. Donna Donella also reported possible inappropriate behavior. These accusations eventually caused him to suspend his run for the presidential nomination.

 David Wu (D-OR) announced he will resign from the House of Representatives after being accused of making unwanted sexual advances toward a fundraiser's daughter became public. July 26, 2011

 Anthony Weiner (D-NY) The newly married Congressman admitted to sending sexually suggestive photos of himself to several women through his Twitter account.[12] He resigned on June 16.(2011)

 Chris Lee, Representative (R-NY) Resigned hours after a news report that the married Congressman had sent a shirtless picture of himself flexing his muscles to a woman via Craigslist, along with flirtatious emails. He did not use a pseudonym or a false email address, but relied on his congressional email for all communication. (2011)

 Mark Souder, (R-IN) a staunch advocate of abstinence and family values, resigned to avoid an ethics investigation into his admitted extramarital affair with a female staffer. Famously, he and she had made a public video in which they both extolled the virtues of sexual abstinence. (2010)

 Eric Massa (D-NY): Resigned to avoid an ethics investigation into his admitted groping and tickling of multiple male staffers. He later stated on Fox News that, "not only did I grope [a staffer], I tickled him until he couldn't breathe," (2010)

 Republican National Committee fired administrator Allison Meyers for her role in allowing $52,000 to be spent for a fund raiser at Club Voyeur which included bondage and topless dancers, (2011)

 Tom Ganley (R-OH) and candidate for the US House of Representatives in 2010 was indicted on seven counts of sexual imposition with a woman he met at a Tea Party Rally. Charges were dropped when the woman refused to continue action.The married father of three has one other sex charge pending.
Note: the score is 6 Republicans to 4 Democrats....The Republicans win the dubious prize of the most documented sex scandals in the 2010 - 2012 time period.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: tonymctones on October 31, 2012, 08:46:54 PM
I hope you don't believe making a bit of a fool of oneself is limited to this congresswoman or to Democrats. Note: the score is 6 Republicans to 4 Democrats....The Republicans win the dubious prize of the most documented sex scandals in the 2010 - 2012 time period.
I certainly do not nor did I give any indiction I did.

If were talking sex scandal all I have to say is Bill Clinton...the score could be 100 to 1 Reps to Dems and if that 1 is Bill Clinton then Dems still win hands down brain child.

You really shouldnt bring up sex scandals and politicians if youre trying to make a the point youre making...
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Primemuscle on October 31, 2012, 08:54:00 PM
Check out this list:

Quote
2000–2009

 Chip Pickering, (R-MS) On July 16, 2009 it was announced that his wife had filed an alienation of affection lawsuit against a woman with whom Chip allegedly had an affair. The lawsuit claimed the adulterous relationship ruined the Pickerings' marriage and his political career. (2009)

  John Ensign Senator (R-NV) Resigned his position as Chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee on June 16, 2009, after admitting he had an affair with the wife of a close friend, both of whom were working on his campaign. Under investigation, he then resigned his seat in Congress 20 months early. (2011) In 1998, Senator Ensign had called for President Bill Clinton (D) to resign after admitting to sexual acts with Monica Lewinsky. (2009)

 John Edwards, Senator (D-NC) His 2008 presidential campaign was seriously undercut when he admitted to an extramarital affair with actress and film producer Rielle Hunter, which produced a child. (see federal political scandals)
 
Vito Fossella, Representative (R-NY) Arrested for drunken driving. Under questioning, the married Congressman and father of three admitted to an affair with Laura Fay that produced a daughter. (2008)

 Tim Mahoney, Representative (D-FL) was elected to the seat of Mark Foley, who had resigned following sexual harassment charges from his congressional interns. Mahoney ran on a campaign promise to make "a world that is safer, more moral." In October 2008, he admitted he placed his mistress on his staff and then fired her, saying, "You work at my pleasure." He then admitted to multiple other affairs.

 Randall L. Tobias, Deputy Secretary of State (R) and former "AIDS Czar" appointed by George W. Bush: Stated that U.S. funds should be denied to countries that permitted prostitution. He resigned on April 27, 2007, after confirming that he had been a customer of Deborah Jeane Palfrey, the DC Madam.

 David Vitter, Senator (R-LA): Took over former Congressman Robert Livingston's House seat in 1999, who resigned following revelations of an extramarital affair. At the time, Vitter stated: "I think Livingston's stepping down makes a very powerful argument that (Bill) Clinton should resign as well ..." Vitters' name was then discovered in the address book of the DC Madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey. (2007)

 Larry Craig, Senator (R-ID) Pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct following his arrest in a Minneapolis airport men's room in June 2007, on a charge of lewd conduct. Senator Craig had previously stated that "people already know that Bill Clinton is a bad boy - a naughty boy." (2007)

 Mark Foley, Representative (R-FL) Resigned when accused of sending sexually explicit emails to underage male congressional pages. He was replaced by Tim Mahoney. (2006)

 Brian J. Doyle, (R) Deputy Press Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security was indicted for seducing what he thought was a 14-year-old girl on the Internet; she was actually a sheriff's deputy. On November 17, 2006, he was sentenced to 5 years in prison, 10 years of probation, and was registered as a sex offender.

 Jack Ryan, Senate candidate (R-IL) During sealed divorce proceedings in 2004, his wife Jeri Ryan accused him of forcing her to go to public sex clubs and described one as "a bizarre club with cages, whips and other apparatus hanging from the ceiling." Ms. Ryan is better known as Seven of Nine from the TV show Star Trek: Voyager.

 Don Sherwood, Representative (R-PA) Failed to win re-election following revelations of a five-year extramarital affair with Cynthia Ore, who accused him of physically abusing her. (2004)

 David Dreier, Representative (R-CA): Voted against a number of gay rights proposals, but was outed concerning his relationship with his chief of staff. (2004)[45] He is featured in the 2009 documentary film Outrage.

 Steven C. LaTourette, Representative (R-OH): Elected in 1994 and had voted to impeach Bill Clinton for the Lewinsky scandal. He himself had a long-term affair with his chief of staff, Jennifer Laptook, while he was married. He married Laptook after his divorce. (2003)

 Strom Thurmond, Senator (R-SC): The noted segregationist fathered a child, Essie Mae Washington-Williams, with a 15-year-old African American who was employed by the Thurmond family. (1925; made public in 2003)

 Jeff Gannon a.k.a. James Dale Guckert, a.k.a. "Bulldog": Admitted to White House press conferences as a journalist without proper vetting, and was allowed to ask such sympathetic questions that The Daily Show referred to him as "Chip Rightwingenstein of the Bush Agenda Gazette." Records show he was admitted to the White House numerous times even when there were no press conferences. He later admitted to being a $200-an-hour gay prostitute who had advertised himself on a series of websites with names such as hotmilitarystud.com." (2005)

 Ed Schrock (R-VA) announced he would abort his 2004 attempt for a third term in Congress after allegedly being caught on tape soliciting sex from a male prostitute after having aggressively opposed various gay-rights issues in Congress, such as same-sex marriage and gays in the military.

 Gary Condit, Representative (D-CA) His affair with 23-year-old intern Chandra Levy was exposed after Levy disappeared. Her body was found a year later and in 2008, a felon with no relation to Condit was charged with her murder. (2001) Condit had often demanded that Bill Clinton "come clean" about his affair with Monica Lewinsky.

What I love is the hiprocasy of some of these folks. They were quick to point the finger at others who'd messed up all the while doing the same and worse themselves. Heck there is even a little GetBig G4P included.

The score: Democrats 3, Republicans 14....Republicans win again!
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Roger Bacon on October 31, 2012, 08:55:25 PM
I'm sure you'd be proud to have this congresswoman representing you.  ::)

She's in Congress?  Please tell me you're kidding  :o
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Primemuscle on October 31, 2012, 08:57:53 PM
I certainly do not nor did I give any indiction I did.

If were talking sex scandal all I have to say is Bill Clinton...the score could be 100 to 1 Reps to Dems and if that 1 is Bill Clinton then Dems still win hands down brain child.

You really shouldnt bring up sex scandals and politicians if youre trying to make a the point youre making...

The point I made is what's a little off key singing during a rally compared to some of the stuff our politicans get in to? Incidentally, take a look at what some of these folks have done. It seems to me Clinton was not as bad as they are in many cases.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Princess L on October 31, 2012, 09:10:45 PM
The point I made is what's a little off key singing during a rally compared to some of the stuff our politicans get in to? Incidentally, take a look at what some of these folks have done. It seems to me Clinton was not as bad as they are in many cases.

The point wasn't about her off key signing  ::)  It was about her demonstrating what an obnoxious loudmouth she is.  It was only one example, of which there are many, of her making an ass of herself.  Even the national liberal media make fun of her.  Hopefully, re-districting will knock her out.

Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Primemuscle on October 31, 2012, 09:30:12 PM
The point wasn't about her off key signing  ::)  It was about her demonstrating what an obnoxious loudmouth she is.  It was only one example, of which there are many, of her making an ass of herself.  Even the national liberal media make fun of her.  Hopefully, re-districting will knock her out.



OK. I still say that being an obnoxious loud mouth is nothing compared to the scandals I listed. If her constituents think she is amiss, they will vote her out. No harm done. I am not going to look for some Republican that made and ass out of themselves on You-tube, but I will say that it seems to me there have been a few, such as Sarah Palin who often seems like an idiot when she speaks and who continues to pimp out her slutty daughter for the media attention and money it brings in.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: whork on November 01, 2012, 03:28:54 AM
We all know how repub feel about rape but a black loud woman is worse apparently
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: WOOO on November 01, 2012, 03:59:39 AM
"democrats"

"republicans"

the american political mind is infantile

parties are irrelevant
opinions are irrelevant
policy is irrelevant
you're all worm meat in the end

find someone to love and live a good life

PS: Romney is a fucktard
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: whork on November 01, 2012, 04:03:26 AM


Democrats are gods will

Just like rapebabies and denying people healthinsurance

Are you proud Princess?
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: The True Adonis on November 01, 2012, 04:42:11 AM
I don`t mind her expressiveness one bit.  I like it.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: blacken700 on November 01, 2012, 05:16:50 AM
repubs all in an uproar about some women singing,but when romney keeps repeating the jeep lie even after it was proven to be a lie not a word  PRICELESS  :D :D
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Dos Equis on November 01, 2012, 11:33:06 AM
Check out this list:

What I love is the hiprocasy of some of these folks. They were quick to point the finger at others who'd messed up all the while doing the same and worse themselves. Heck there is even a little GetBig G4P included.

The score: Democrats 3, Republicans 14....Republicans win again!

Or not.   :)

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=165554.0
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Princess L on November 01, 2012, 12:12:47 PM
OK. I still say that being an obnoxious loud mouth is nothing compared to the scandals I listed. If her constituents think she is amiss, they will vote her out. No harm done. I am not going to look for some Republican that made and ass out of themselves on You-tube, but I will say that it seems to me there have been a few, such as Sarah Palin who often seems like an idiot when she speaks and who continues to pimp out her slutty daughter for the media attention and money it brings in.

Of course her constituents love her.  She fights to preserve welfare fraud.  She fights against requiring voter ID.  She fights to have your tax dollar pay for abortions, because "it is better to have an abortion than make a child be forced to live “eating Ramen noodles” and “mayonnaise sandwiches.”
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Primemuscle on November 01, 2012, 12:20:45 PM
Or not.   :)

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=165554.0

How this character being a crook is Hillary Clinton's fault is beyond my comprehension. Are you suggesting if someone sets up a phony campaign donation fund, collecting money from unsuspecting donors and which never goes to support the campaign, but is actually intended for personal gain is the fault of the candidate or party who was exploited by the crook? That is just ludicrous!
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Dos Equis on November 01, 2012, 12:24:13 PM
How this character being a crook is Hillary Clinton's fault is beyond my comprehension. Are you suggesting if someone sets up a phony campaign donation fund, collecting money from unsuspecting donors and which never goes to support the campaign, but is actually intended for personal gain is the fault of the candidate or party who was exploited by the crook? That is just ludicrous!

No.  I'm suggesting Democrats have a sordid history of scandal.  True of both parties, but just highlighted throughout the thread the misconduct at fairly high levels involving numerous Democrats. 
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Primemuscle on November 01, 2012, 12:33:05 PM
Of course her constituents love her.  She fights to preserve welfare fraud.  She fights against requiring voter ID.  She fights to have your tax dollar pay for abortions, because "it is better to have an abortion than make a child be forced to live “eating Ramen noodles” and “mayonnaise sandwiches.”

Are you suggesting we have a shortage of babies in this country? Are you willing to adopt all those kids whose parents have no means to support them and worse have no desire or often ability to take care of them in anyway, including basic nurturing? Perhaps you could start a personal charity for unwanted children who were not aborted and are often abused.

I believe as in most states, Wisconsin requires ID to register to vote. See below:

Quote
How do I register to vote?
 
To vote in Wisconsin you need to be registered. You can register any time up to and including election day. Before an election, you can register in person at your city clerk's office, or by completing a voter registration application and mailing it to your city clerk. On election day, you can register at your polling place with ID and proof of address.
http://wisconsinvote.org/resources (http://wisconsinvote.org/resources)

In Oregon, where I live you can register to vote online. Here is what you'll need to do that:

Quote
Oregon adults can register online beginning 9 a.m. Monday by going to the Internet site: www.oregonvotes.org. They will be required to have a valid Oregon driver's license, permit or identification card. For those who register online, the signatures on their driver's licenses, permits or ID cards will serve as the signatures for voter registration cards. Those signatures will be checked to validate mail ballots in elections.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Soul Crusher on November 01, 2012, 12:57:52 PM



Perfect example of everything wrong w this country.   
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Princess L on November 01, 2012, 03:48:50 PM
Are you suggesting we have a shortage of babies in this country? Are you willing to adopt all those kids whose parents have no means to support them and worse have no desire or often ability to take care of them in anyway, including basic nurturing? Perhaps you could start a personal charity for unwanted children who were not aborted and are often abused.

I believe as in most states, Wisconsin requires ID to register to vote. See below:
 http://wisconsinvote.org/resources (http://wisconsinvote.org/resources)

In Oregon, where I live you can register to vote online. Here is what you'll need to do that:
 

Are you kidding?  That's your argument?  So what you're saying is that you have no problem with YOUR tax dollars funding abortions and contraception (which is one in the same for many)?

And Wisconsin DOES NOT require an ID to vote (or register).

http://gab.wi.gov/elections-voting/voters/registration-voting

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-11-01/pennsylvania-judge-declines-to-intervene-in-voter-id-case

Photo ID Not Required

Two separate judges, on March 6 and March 12, 2012, have issued injunctions preventing the Government Accountability Board from enforcing photo ID requirements in 2011 Act 23. The Wisconsin Department of Justice has appealed those injunctions. Until they are resolved, no photo ID is required to receive a ballot.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: POB on November 01, 2012, 03:55:56 PM




This ones better :D
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Primemuscle on November 01, 2012, 04:24:25 PM
Are you kidding?  That's your argument?  So what you're saying is that you have no problem with YOUR tax dollars funding abortions and contraception (which is one in the same for many)?

And Wisconsin DOES NOT require an ID to vote (or register).

http://gab.wi.gov/elections-voting/voters/registration-voting

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-11-01/pennsylvania-judge-declines-to-intervene-in-voter-id-case

Photo ID Not Required

 The following voter registration information is from the link you provided.

Quote
If the elector does not have a current, valid Wisconsin driver license, Wisconsin state ID card, or Social Security Number, the applicant may indicate this by filling in the appropriate circle on the registration form.  (Box 2 on GAB-131) 

THE REGISTRATION CANNOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL THE ELECTOR PROVIDES THIS INFORMATION.

If the voter has a current, valid Wisconsin driver license but does not know the number and did not bring it to the polling place, poll workers must allow the voter to vote by provisional ballot. (Note: the voter CANNOT use the last 4 digits of their Social Security Number if he or she has been issued a Wisconsin driver’s license). The provisional ballot will not be counted until the voter either:
 
a)     brings his or her driver license number to his or her polling place before the polls close at 8:00 pm on Election Day; or
 
b)     transmits (via fax, email, telephone call or personal visit) his or her driver license number to the municipal clerk before 4:00 pm on the Friday after the Election.

Just as you say, I do not have a problem with my tax dollars paying for abortion and/or contraception. Where do you suppose government gets the money to pay for welfare, children's services, medical care for indigent children and their mothers and eventually prisons for those kids that don't survive the system? Which demographic do you suppose has the highest rate of unwanted and underage pregnancies?
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Princess L on November 01, 2012, 04:43:41 PM
The following voter registration information is from the link you provided.


Voter Photo ID provisions of 2011 Wisconsin Act 23 are currently enjoined orders of by two Wisconsin circuit courts. Those decisions have been appealed by the Attorney General, but until they are resolved, no photo ID is required to receive a ballot in Wisconsin. 

On September 27, 2012, the Wisconsin Supreme Court declined for a second time to hear the cases prior to action by the Court of Appeals.




Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Primemuscle on November 01, 2012, 07:32:53 PM

Voter Photo ID provisions of 2011 Wisconsin Act 23 are currently enjoined orders of by two Wisconsin circuit courts. Those decisions have been appealed by the Attorney General, but until they are resolved, no photo ID is required to receive a ballot in Wisconsin. 

On September 27, 2012, the Wisconsin Supreme Court declined for a second time to hear the cases prior to action by the Court of Appeals.






OK Princess, So how is this the congresswoman in the video's or for that matter the Democratic party's fault? Seems like this is an issue with the supreme court.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Soul Crusher on November 01, 2012, 07:45:28 PM
OK Princess, So how is this the congresswoman in the video's or for that matter the Democratic party's fault? Seems like this is an issue with the supreme court.



She is a perfect example of a democrat.   A tax sponging locust of tax dollars. 
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Princess L on November 01, 2012, 08:45:47 PM
OK Princess, So how is this the congresswoman in the video's or for that matter the Democratic party's fault? Seems like this is an issue with the supreme court.

*sigh* Voter ID bill was passed last year.  Dems cried suppression and subsequently filed a lawsuit.

The Milwaukee branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and immigrant rights group Voces de la Frontera sued, arguing the law creates too heavy a burden on voters.

Dane County Circuit Judge David Flanagan (D) sided with the groups, ruling the law impairs the right to vote.

State Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said in a statement Wednesday he believes the law is constitutional.

Another (D) Madison judge has blocked the law in a separate lawsuit filed by the League of Women Voters. Van Hollen is appealing that decision, too.


http://www.nbc15.com/home/headlines/Wisconsin_Judge_Temporarily_Stops_New_Voter_ID_Law_141623163.html
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Primemuscle on November 02, 2012, 01:50:20 AM
*sigh* Voter ID bill was passed last year.  Dems cried suppression and subsequently filed a lawsuit.

The Milwaukee branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and immigrant rights group Voces de la Frontera sued, arguing the law creates too heavy a burden on voters.

Dane County Circuit Judge David Flanagan (D) sided with the groups, ruling the law impairs the right to vote.

State Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said in a statement Wednesday he believes the law is constitutional.

Another (D) Madison judge has blocked the law in a separate lawsuit filed by the League of Women Voters. Van Hollen is appealing that decision, too.


http://www.nbc15.com/home/headlines/Wisconsin_Judge_Temporarily_Stops_New_Voter_ID_Law_141623163.html

Here is the thing, Princess. This land was once the exclusive home of the American Indian. All the rest of us are immigrants.

My family immigrated with the Pilgrims on the Mayflower and fought in the Revolutionary War. I qualify to be a member or the SAR (Sons of the American Revolution, just in the case you don't know what that means). My forefathers were tobacco plantation owners who kept African American slaves which also were immigrants to this land. Despite my pedigree of American heritage, I am still the ancestor of immigrants from England. So now tell me, who am I to say who qualifies as an American and who does not? Tell me also, who are you to do the same?

I am a Democrat and I agree that all registered voters should be legal citizens of the U.S.  I have no problem with folks having to provide proof that they have a legal right to vote. The truth is that many Republicans are also recent immigrants. To suggest that Democrats are all for a bunch of "wet backs" seeking to take over this country is simply crazy. The truth of the matter is that Latinos (Spanish Americans) were here long before most of us European settlers arrived. We all learned this in elementary school history. Check out what was originally Spanish territory,

But then, I live in the wild, wild west and am counted among the multitude of Democrats in my neck of the woods and maybe this disqualifies me as being a true patriotic American in the eyes of some Midwesterner "tea party" folks these days.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Roger Bacon on November 02, 2012, 03:16:58 AM
Here is the thing, Princess. This land was once the exclusive home of the American Indian. All the rest of us are immigrants.

My family immigrated with the Pilgrims on the Mayflower and fought in the Revolutionary War. I qualify to be a member or the SAR (Sons of the American Revolution, just in the case you don't know what that means). My forefathers were tobacco plantation owners who kept African American slaves which also were immigrants to this land. Despite my pedigree of American heritage, I am still the ancestor of immigrants from England. So now tell me, who am I to say who qualifies as an American and who does not? Tell me also, who are you to do the same?

I am a Democrat and I agree that all registered voters should be legal citizens of the U.S.  I have no problem with folks having to provide proof that they have a legal right to vote. The truth is that many Republicans are also recent immigrants. To suggest that Democrats are all for a bunch of "wet backs" seeking to take over this country is simply crazy. The truth of the matter is that Latinos (Spanish Americans) were here long before most of us European settlers arrived. We all learned this in elementary school history. Check out what was originally Spanish territory,

But then, I live in the wild, wild west and am counted among the multitude of Democrats in my neck of the woods and maybe this disqualifies me as being a true patriotic American in the eyes of some Midwesterner "tea party" folks these days.

Your point?  Or are you just rambling?

The 18th and 19th century are long past, we should absolutely set stringent standards as to who qualify to be American citizens.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: whork on November 02, 2012, 04:56:00 AM
Of course her constituents love her.  She fights to preserve welfare fraud.  She fights against requiring voter ID.  She fights to have your tax dollar pay for abortions, because "it is better to have an abortion than make a child be forced to live “eating Ramen noodles” and “mayonnaise sandwiches.”

You already for wars the middle east abortions and contraceptions is small cash

Are you stupid or just posting a repub talking point like the good dog you are?
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Primemuscle on November 02, 2012, 10:30:44 AM
Your point?  Or are you just rambling?

The 18th and 19th century are long past, we should absolutely set stringent standards as to who qualify to be American citizens.

You are entitled to your opinion. My guess is that it makes little difference to you who people are or how they got here, if they agree with you they are fine, but if they don't then get rid of them. In other words, if Latinos vote Republican then they are fine, but if they vote Democrat, send them back to wherever they came from.

I wouldn't be surprised if you don't care much of African Americans either. Bet you loved Sarah Palin who in some people's opinion often makes a big ass out of herself. Why not post a video of her doing that?
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Roger Bacon on November 02, 2012, 10:50:02 AM
You are entitled to your opinion. My guess is that it makes little difference to you who people are or how they got here, if they agree with you they are fine, but if they don't then get rid of them. In other words, if Latinos vote Republican then they are fine, but if they vote Democrat, send them back to wherever they came from.

I wouldn't be surprised if you don't care much of African Americans either. Bet you loved Sarah Palin who in some people's opinion often makes a big ass out of herself. Why not post a video of her doing that?

I voted for Obama in 2008.  I was a supporter, people here can back that up.




You asshole
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Princess L on November 02, 2012, 11:35:06 AM
Here is the thing, Princess. This land was once the exclusive home of the American Indian. All the rest of us are immigrants.

My family immigrated with the Pilgrims on the Mayflower and fought in the Revolutionary War. I qualify to be a member or the SAR (Sons of the American Revolution, just in the case you don't know what that means). My forefathers were tobacco plantation owners who kept African American slaves which also were immigrants to this land. Despite my pedigree of American heritage, I am still the ancestor of immigrants from England. So now tell me, who am I to say who qualifies as an American and who does not? Tell me also, who are you to do the same?

I am a Democrat and I agree that all registered voters should be legal citizens of the U.S.  I have no problem with folks having to provide proof that they have a legal right to vote. The truth is that many Republicans are also recent immigrants. To suggest that Democrats are all for a bunch of "wet backs" seeking to take over this country is simply crazy. The truth of the matter is that Latinos (Spanish Americans) were here long before most of us European settlers arrived. We all learned this in elementary school history. Check out what was originally Spanish territory,

But then, I live in the wild, wild west and am counted among the multitude of Democrats in my neck of the woods and maybe this disqualifies me as being a true patriotic American in the eyes of some Midwesterner "tea party" folks these days.

Thank you for the history lesson.  Once again, you've drifted so far outside the scope, I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make. 


Voter ID - PROVIDE A PICTURE ID WITH PROOF OF WHERE YOU RESIDE.  Where is the problem with that?  
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: The True Adonis on November 02, 2012, 12:05:52 PM

Thank you for the history lesson.  Once again, you've drifted so far outside the scope, I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make.  


Voter ID - PROVIDE A PICTURE ID WITH PROOF OF WHERE YOU RESIDE.  Where is the problem with that?  
The problem with that is many people don`t have access or a way to get a Picture ID or even the money to do so.  The right to vote is a guaranteed right and there should be zero loopholes to have to jump through in order to do so.  Its is a guaranteed right.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Roger Bacon on November 02, 2012, 12:18:01 PM
The problem with that is many people don`t have access or a way to get a Picture ID or even the money to do so.  The right to vote is a guaranteed right and there should be zero loopholes to have to jump through in order to do so.  Its is a guaranteed right.

Yeah, this is a tough one...
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Princess L on November 02, 2012, 12:19:37 PM
The problem with that is many people don`t have access or a way to get a Picture ID or even the money to do so.  The right to vote is a guaranteed right and there should be zero loopholes to have to jump through in order to do so.  Its is a guaranteed right.

How do I get a FREE photo ID?

Voter Photo ID provisions of 2011 Wisconsin Act 23 are currently enjoined orders of by two Wisconsin circuit courts. Those decisions have been appealed by the Attorney General, but until they are resolved, no photo ID is required to receive a ballot in Wisconsin.

However, Wisconsin law still requires the Department of Transportation to provide free ID cards to any individual who will be at least 18 years of age on the date of the next election and who requests a free ID for the purpose of voting. The regular fee is $28.

For information about getting a state identification card, please visit the DOT's website:

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/drivers/drivers/apply/idcard.htm

Due to the need to provide a birth certificate and/or other documents to receive a DOT-issued ID, individuals should start the process of obtaining a statutory identification well in advance of an election at which they wish to vote.  You may also consult our pamphlet on how to get a free state ID card.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Montague on November 02, 2012, 12:30:41 PM
How do I get a FREE photo ID?

Voter Photo ID provisions of 2011 Wisconsin Act 23 are currently enjoined orders of by two Wisconsin circuit courts. Those decisions have been appealed by the Attorney General, but until they are resolved, no photo ID is required to receive a ballot in Wisconsin.

However, Wisconsin law still requires the Department of Transportation to provide free ID cards to any individual who will be at least 18 years of age on the date of the next election and who requests a free ID for the purpose of voting. The regular fee is $28.

For information about getting a state identification card, please visit the DOT's website:

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/drivers/drivers/apply/idcard.htm

Due to the need to provide a birth certificate and/or other documents to receive a DOT-issued ID, individuals should start the process of obtaining a statutory identification well in advance of an election at which they wish to vote.  You may also consult our pamphlet on how to get a free state ID card.



Damn loopholes.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Primemuscle on November 02, 2012, 12:53:44 PM

Thank you for the history lesson.  Once again, you've drifted so far outside the scope, I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make. 


Voter ID - PROVIDE A PICTURE ID WITH PROOF OF WHERE YOU RESIDE.  Where is the problem with that?  

I have no problem with people having to prove they are legal U.S. citizens in order to vote here and I am a Democrat. Is this within the scope?

Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Montague on November 02, 2012, 12:55:00 PM
The problem with that is many people don`t have access or a way to get a Picture ID or even the money to do so.


From the ten minutes that I worked at a bank years ago, I learned about the process that recipients of SSI/welfare must go through in order to receive the money they take from my paycheck.

This is neat:

One cannot simply cash his/her SSI check from the U.S. Treasury. The check must first be deposited into a bank account under the name and social security number of the recipient. Afterwards, the recipient may withdraw the money from their account.

The fact is: you need some form of state ID (a driver's license or state photo ID) to open a bank account, and even "poor" people on welfare are able to get this. They all are and do; it's the only way to receive their "redistributed wealth."

No voter ID requirement will interfere with disadvantaged people's (or ANY LEGAL CITIZEN'S) ability to vote, and that is not what Democrats are concerned with.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Primemuscle on November 02, 2012, 01:08:54 PM
Voter IDs laws have become a political flashpoint in what's gearing up to be another close election year. Supporters say the laws — which 30 states have now enacted in some form — are needed to combat voter fraud, while critics see them as a tactic to disenfranchise voters.

Voting law opponents contend these laws disproportionately affect elderly, minority and low-income groups that tend to vote Democratic. Obtaining photo ID can be costly and burdensome, with even free state ID requiring documents like a birth certificate that can cost up to $25 in some places. According to a study from NYU's Brennan Center, 11 percent of voting-age citizens lack necessary photo ID while many people in rural areas have trouble accessing ID offices. During closing arguments in a recent case over Texas's voter ID law, a lawyer for the state brushed aside these obstacles as the "reality to life of choosing to live in that part of Texas."
 
Attorney General Eric Holder and others have compared the laws to a poll tax, in which Southern states during the Jim Crow era imposed voting fees, which discouraged blacks, and even some poor whites -- until the passage of grandfather clauses -- from voting.

Given the sometimes costly steps required to obtain needed documents today, legal scholars argue that photo ID laws create a new "financial barrier to the ballot box."
 
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Montague on November 02, 2012, 01:26:15 PM
My family immigrated with the Pilgrims on the Mayflower and fought in the Revolutionary War.  So now tell me, who am I to say who qualifies as an American and who does not? Tell me also, who are you to do the same?


There have been some developments since 1620:

American colonization
Declaration of Independence
The Articles of Confederation
The U.S. Constitution
The abolition of slavery
The end of racial segregation
A few sprinkles of war
and maybe one or two more that I'm missing.

The point is, we're almost 400 years post-Plymouth Rock. Most things are done differently all over the world, including immigrating to the United States of America.
There are proper and necessary channels to go through. Lot of people do, and THOSE are the ones who qualify as Americans.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: tbombz on November 02, 2012, 01:30:16 PM
I'm sure you'd be proud to have this congresswoman representing you.  ::)
princess, your forcing me to assume that either you hate music, or you are a racist. so which is it?  ;D
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Primemuscle on November 02, 2012, 04:07:29 PM

There have been some developments since 1620:

American colonization
Declaration of Independence
The Articles of Confederation
The U.S. Constitution
The abolition of slavery
The end of racial segregation
A few sprinkles of war
and maybe one or two more that I'm missing.

The point is, we're almost 400 years post-Plymouth Rock. Most things are done differently all over the world, including immigrating to the United States of America.
There are proper and necessary channels to go through. Lot of people do, and THOSE are the ones who qualify as Americans.

If it seemed I was arguing against immigrants going through proper channels to become a U.S. citizen, I wasn't. Not only that, I think if someone wants to become a citizen of this country, they should at least learn some rudimentary English, as did immigrants in the past.

What bothers me is people who would deny others citizenship because of their age, race, religion or country of origin.


Inscription on the Statue of Liberty

Author: Emma Lazarus

 Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breath free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest tost to me,
 I lift my lamp beside the golden door.


Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: _bruce_ on November 02, 2012, 04:23:54 PM
Filt.
Title: Re: Democrats must be proud
Post by: Roger Bacon on November 03, 2012, 01:31:30 AM
What bothers me is people who would deny others citizenship because of their age, race, religion or country of origin.

Why shouldn't we restrict immigration to the most productive, and intelligent people? 

???